changes fitted to be the rank and file of a movement based on a long
history, confronted by numerous obstacles, and demanding strenuous,
wisely-directed, ordered effort, without sudden leaps backwards and
forwards?
I think, then, that the course of events will compel Zionism to come
gradually to understand itself and its supporters: to understand itself
as a national movement of a _spiritual_ character, whose aim is to
satisfy the demand for a true and free national life in accordance with
our distinctive spirit; and to find its supporters in that nationalist
section which is sufficiently conscious, in all its individual members,
of this demand, and which in a certain sense may be called a “spiritual
proletariate.”
For, in spite of all the numerous latter-day sections of Jews, with
their abbreviated names, it is still doubtful whether among all our
“S.D.” and “S.S.”[65] with their ceaseless talk about their
“proletariate psychology,” there is really any considerable number of
members who can properly be held to belong to the proletariate in the
Socialist sense of the word. The mission of the proletariate is to
hasten the Socialist solution by the concentration of wealth; and this
mission can be fulfilled only by those who work in large industrial
undertakings. The work of the master-workman and his assistants is not
proletariate work, because, so far from hastening, it hinders that
solution. Now the working-class Jew has practically no place in the
large industrial undertakings; generally speaking, the so-called
proletariate section of the Jews belongs to the class of master-workmen.
But, on the other hand, there is among the Jews, and only among them, a
proletariate in another sense—in the sense indicated by the combination
of “national” and “spiritual.” The position and the needs of this
proletariate, which are common to all its individual members, compel it
to feel a deep-rooted and powerful desire for a change in the
established order; but the change desired in this case is not a
concentration of the means of production, but just the opposite. What is
wanted is a new means of production, wherewith to create a product of a
special character. Among all civilised nations ours is the only one that
has no special means of production of its own wherewith to create its
spiritual and intellectual wealth, but is compelled to make use of the
means provided by other nations—their languages, their literatures,
their schools and universities, and so forth—and thus to enrich the
owners of these means of production by its work. But the proletariate
that produces material wealth receives in payment at least a part of the
wealth produced by its labour, and only the surplus is left to the owner
of the means of production; whereas in our case almost all the result of
our toil goes to swell the wealth of others. Our own national treasury
is impoverished and empty; our own distinctive spirit dwindles and
dwindles.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account